Yep, that's right. This dude thinks he can be POTUS but he literally has no idea what a neoconservative is. Apparently he was living under a rock for the entirety of Bush's presidency. Or he was just too focused on his pizza shops.

Cain doesn't even pretend to have any defined policies. For example, consider his foreign policy as discussed in the article I posted:

"I don't think the war in Iraq was a mistake, because there were a lot of other reasons we needed to go to Iraq, and there have been a lot of benefits that have come out of Iraq," he said, although he didn't elaborate on the nature of the benefits.

When asked on Sunday how he would define victory in Afghanistan, Cain simply said he would take the advice of the commanders.

"In Afghanistan, victory is: Can we leave Afghanistan in a situation where they can defend themselves? I don't know if that's possible right now," he replied. "Because here again, what do the commanders on the ground say? What does the intelligence community say? A lot of analysis needs to go into determining whether or not there is a definition of victory in Afghanistan."

Oh yeah, not to mention that he's a former regional Federal Reserve chairman who praised Alan Greenspan's record a few days ago in a debate. Rightfully so, Ron Paul responded and told Cain that Greenspan was absolutely disastrous. Luckily for Cain he didn't have to respond, considering he probably genuinely does not understand the issue at all. I bet he just named the only chairman aside from Bernanke that he could possibly think of. Perhaps his ignorance of the issue is what led him to deny the necessity of a Federal Reserve audit, even calling those who would press for an audit ignorant and stupid. (He denied this when Paul asked him about it at the debate, but instantly Paul's campaign came up with the video of Cain saying exactly what Paul accused him of.)

I think the worst part about Cain is that in 2005, he was fully confident that the housing bubble would not burst (Paul predicted it in 2003 by the way...) and in late 2008 said the economy was fine, going so far as to scoff at those who were concerned about it. Just like his non-existent foreign policy, in the attached video Cain says that it's okay that he didn't see the crisis coming even a week in advance, because he has economic advisers that will perform that job for him.

... *FACEPALM* How the hell could anyone support this guy??????? He openly doesn't know sh!t about anything and says that it's his advisers jobs to run the country and define policies. So Mr. Cain, aside from the fact that you were a successful businessman, why in the world should anyone vote for you?

In short, the case against Herman Cain: this guy has zero foreign policy, tries to ignore it as much as he can, and only talks about it in extremely ambiguous terms when he is forced to deal with it. He knows zero about the economy, staring the collapse right in the face and laughing at anyone who tried to do anything about it. He doesn't know what a neoconservative is. He doesn't understand why anyone would want to audit the Fed, doesn't think anything worthwhile would come of it, and has said that the people who are really concerned about that issue are "ignorant." He supported the TARP bailouts. He's taking the next few months off to promote his new book, which seems to indicate that he has absolutely no interest in getting elected to anything. He certainly didn't come prepared.

I literally fail to comprehend why anyone with a working brain would vote this man into office for anything, because he's an ignoramus in just about every possible way. To his credit, I hear he can cook up a mean pizza...

Just realized that when Cain has to explain why he thought Alan Greenspan should be a model for future Fed chairmen, you see a couple of candidates laughing (I specifically noticed Santorum) because they realize that he does not have a clue what he's talking about. And Santorum didn't seem to be laughing in a snide way either - it was either because Cain was caught like a deer in headlights, or because he knew that Ron Paul was going to have a field day with this.

It's honestly the most humorous thing I've ever seen in one of these debates. He's just babbling on with no substance and it's so obvious that he's thinking "I have no idea what to say right now, oh God when can I stop talking...."

taking out of context. ignoring the noise from the biased author, it is clear cain is not pleading ignorance about neo-conservatism.

verbatim:

"I'm not familiar with the neoconservative movement," admitted Cain. "I'm familiar with the conservative movement. Let me define what I mean by the conservative movement -- less government, less taxes, more individual responsibility."

i would like to see the interview in its entirety. if cain is identifying with self-described neo-conservatives (neo-con is basically a buzzword leftwingers label everyone they disagree with) then clearly he is familiar with the ideology.

To both of you guys - it's extremely clear from the context that he just doesn't have any idea what a neoconservative is. Plus beyond that, if you see how he tries to BS his way out of situations where he just has no idea what's going on, it's just like that. I appreciate the anti-Washington appeal, and so do a lot of people, but that doesn't mean you can be completely ignorant of history and be off the hook for having any defined policies whatsoever. He constantly brings up his advisers who will apparently form his foreign policy and economic policy for him. Which brings up the question of why don't they just run for President, if he relies solely on them to form his ideas.

People will start to realize this about him very soon and his momentum will be gone faster than it rose. Theoretically, people may say in a phone poll that they're leaning toward him, but let's face it - somebody who constantly says his advisers will do all his work for him and who has never been elected to any form of office willnot get a substantial amount of votes.

Or maybe I'm just overestimating the intelligence of the average Republican voter. I sure as f*ck hope not.

At 10/17/2011 12:49:42 AM, JuiceSqueeze wrote:taking out of context. ignoring the noise from the biased author, it is clear cain is not pleading ignorance about neo-conservatism.

verbatim:

"I'm not familiar with the neoconservative movement," admitted Cain. "I'm familiar with the conservative movement. Let me define what I mean by the conservative movement -- less government, less taxes, more individual responsibility."

i would like to see the interview in its entirety. if cain is identifying with self-described neo-conservatives (neo-con is basically a buzzword leftwingers label everyone they disagree with) then clearly he is familiar with the ideology.

Not exactly. The term neo conservative is used to differentiate them from paleo conservatives or the "old right" who believed in an isolationist foreign policy as opposed to the more aggressive foreign policy of anti-communists or the modern war of terror.

At 10/17/2011 12:49:42 AM, JuiceSqueeze wrote:taking out of context. ignoring the noise from the biased author, it is clear cain is not pleading ignorance about neo-conservatism.

verbatim:

"I'm not familiar with the neoconservative movement," admitted Cain. "I'm familiar with the conservative movement. Let me define what I mean by the conservative movement -- less government, less taxes, more individual responsibility."

i would like to see the interview in its entirety. if cain is identifying with self-described neo-conservatives (neo-con is basically a buzzword leftwingers label everyone they disagree with) then clearly he is familiar with the ideology.

Not exactly. The term neo conservative is used to differentiate them from paleo conservatives or the "old right" who believed in an isolationist foreign policy as opposed to the more aggressive foreign policy of anti-communists or the modern war of terror.

neo-conservatism is a legitimate political philosophy, but when "journalists" write "neo-con" is it a tell-tell sign of buzzword usage.

At 10/17/2011 12:49:42 AM, JuiceSqueeze wrote:taking out of context. ignoring the noise from the biased author, it is clear cain is not pleading ignorance about neo-conservatism.

verbatim:

"I'm not familiar with the neoconservative movement," admitted Cain. "I'm familiar with the conservative movement. Let me define what I mean by the conservative movement -- less government, less taxes, more individual responsibility."

i would like to see the interview in its entirety. if cain is identifying with self-described neo-conservatives (neo-con is basically a buzzword leftwingers label everyone they disagree with) then clearly he is familiar with the ideology.

Not exactly. The term neo conservative is used to differentiate them from paleo conservatives or the "old right" who believed in an isolationist foreign policy as opposed to the more aggressive foreign policy of anti-communists or the modern war of terror.

neo-conservatism is a legitimate political philosophy, but when "journalists" write "neo-con" is it a tell-tell sign of buzzword usage.

it's the equivalent of calling someone a libtard.

Not true at all. Neocon is an abbreviation of an actual phrase (neoconservativism= a legit political philosophy). Libtard is a moronic insult that is just a silly combination of two words and doesn't stand for anything. Neocon is NOT necessarily derogatory though it is almost exclusively used that way. Again, it's a legitimate phrase, "libtard" is just ridiculous and not a word.

Besides....... the journalist used the word neoconservative. He made it extremely clear what he was asking of Cain. It is apparent that Cain does not know the difference between a conservative and a neoconservative. He really doesn't know much about government, history, or political philosophy at all, so this should not come as a surprise.

At 10/17/2011 12:49:42 AM, JuiceSqueeze wrote:taking out of context. ignoring the noise from the biased author, it is clear cain is not pleading ignorance about neo-conservatism.

verbatim:

"I'm not familiar with the neoconservative movement," admitted Cain. "I'm familiar with the conservative movement. Let me define what I mean by the conservative movement -- less government, less taxes, more individual responsibility."

i would like to see the interview in its entirety. if cain is identifying with self-described neo-conservatives (neo-con is basically a buzzword leftwingers label everyone they disagree with) then clearly he is familiar with the ideology.

Not exactly. The term neo conservative is used to differentiate them from paleo conservatives or the "old right" who believed in an isolationist foreign policy as opposed to the more aggressive foreign policy of anti-communists or the modern war of terror.

Only sort of true. Although you are right to focus on foreign policy, the Old Right has nothing to do with it. The Old Right has been politically dead since the New Deal it died fighting. The founding fathers of neoconservatism were all members of the postwar Democratic consensus of big government at home and interventionism abroad. They split with that when the New Left came about in the same party with its own strain of noninterventionism and perceived disrespect for law and order. A neocon is a "liberal who has been mugged." Lock up the criminals, liberate countries from dictators, that's what neocons are all about-- and like European "conservatives" they don't question the legitimacy of the welfare/regulatory state.

Libtard is a moronic insult that is just a silly combination of two words and doesn't stand for anything.

It clearly stands for liberal retard. Jeez.

It came to be at its height. It was commanded to command. It was a capital before its first stone was laid. It was a monument to the spirit of man.

At 10/17/2011 4:02:06 AM, Kinesis wrote:Who cares, anyway? No-one thinks Cain is going to win. It looks like Romney is right now, assuming the row over mormonism doesn't cost him too much support.

Romney's 25% is the same 25% from the last election. He doesn't have any fans, just people who think "i guess I have to go with Romney, -sigh-". In fact, the rise of Cain is likely due to the fact that the GOP is unsatisfied with Romney, the front runner. They'll pretty much take any mildly competent politician over the boring, uninspiring Mitt Romney.

After seeing the Bloomberg debate, I have to admit, I was wrong about Cain. I was initially against him, then I was somewhat for him, but I think his true colors showed at the debate that he really is just another status quo fascist who doesn't believe the Federal Reserve has done any wrong (admitting an audit will find nothing), who praised the global fascist Alan Greenspan, who is in favor of the Drug War, in favor of nearly every Middle East war, and his tax plan will not be all that great.

Cain will not be as bad as Romney or Perry, but he will still be pretty bad.

Yep, that's right. This dude thinks he can be POTUS but he literally has no idea what a neoconservative is. Apparently he was living under a rock for the entirety of Bush's presidency. Or he was just too focused on his pizza shops.

Cain doesn't even pretend to have any defined policies. For example, consider his foreign policy as discussed in the article I posted:

"I don't think the war in Iraq was a mistake, because there were a lot of other reasons we needed to go to Iraq, and there have been a lot of benefits that have come out of Iraq," he said, although he didn't elaborate on the nature of the benefits.

When asked on Sunday how he would define victory in Afghanistan, Cain simply said he would take the advice of the commanders.

"In Afghanistan, victory is: Can we leave Afghanistan in a situation where they can defend themselves? I don't know if that's possible right now," he replied. "Because here again, what do the commanders on the ground say? What does the intelligence community say? A lot of analysis needs to go into determining whether or not there is a definition of victory in Afghanistan."

Oh yeah, not to mention that he's a former regional Federal Reserve chairman who praised Alan Greenspan's record a few days ago in a debate. Rightfully so, Ron Paul responded and told Cain that Greenspan was absolutely disastrous. Luckily for Cain he didn't have to respond, considering he probably genuinely does not understand the issue at all. I bet he just named the only chairman aside from Bernanke that he could possibly think of. Perhaps his ignorance of the issue is what led him to deny the necessity of a Federal Reserve audit, even calling those who would press for an audit ignorant and stupid. (He denied this when Paul asked him about it at the debate, but instantly Paul's campaign came up with the video of Cain saying exactly what Paul accused him of.)

I think the worst part about Cain is that in 2005, he was fully confident that the housing bubble would not burst (Paul predicted it in 2003 by the way...) and in late 2008 said the economy was fine, going so far as to scoff at those who were concerned about it. Just like his non-existent foreign policy, in the attached video Cain says that it's okay that he didn't see the crisis coming even a week in advance, because he has economic advisers that will perform that job for him.

... *FACEPALM* How the hell could anyone support this guy??????? He openly doesn't know sh!t about anything and says that it's his advisers jobs to run the country and define policies. So Mr. Cain, aside from the fact that you were a successful businessman, why in the world should anyone vote for you?

In short, the case against Herman Cain: this guy has zero foreign policy, tries to ignore it as much as he can, and only talks about it in extremely ambiguous terms when he is forced to deal with it. He knows zero about the economy, staring the collapse right in the face and laughing at anyone who tried to do anything about it. He doesn't know what a neoconservative is. He doesn't understand why anyone would want to audit the Fed, doesn't think anything worthwhile would come of it, and has said that the people who are really concerned about that issue are "ignorant." He supported the TARP bailouts. He's taking the next few months off to promote his new book, which seems to indicate that he has absolutely no interest in getting elected to anything. He certainly didn't come prepared.

I literally fail to comprehend why anyone with a working brain would vote this man into office for anything, because he's an ignoramus in just about every possible way. To his credit, I hear he can cook up a mean pizza...

There is no neocon movement. If there is who's in charge? Who speaks for neocon's? what is their agenda? It's all crap. Neocon is just a buzz word to portray conservatism in a negative light. It worthless jiberish. Nazi Neocon it's all garbage trash talk. Democrats are neocons.

In contemporary usage, the term "neoconservative" was used in 1973 to criticize American liberals and social democrats who had criticized the ambitions and outcomes of the Great Society's welfare programs.